卫生学的一小部分:规定性和禁止性标志的说服力中的正当性和后果

IF 1.8 3区心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL

Social Influence Pub Date : 2016-10-01 DOI:10.1080/15534510.2016.1267663

Krzysztof J. Leoniak, Konrad Maj

{"title":"卫生学的一小部分:规定性和禁止性标志的说服力中的正当性和后果","authors":"Krzysztof J. Leoniak, Konrad Maj","doi":"10.1080/15534510.2016.1267663","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Studies concerning sign effectiveness highlight the use of justifications and information about consequences of non-compliance. Assuming that the most persuasive messages contain both types of information, we compared the effectiveness of eight different signs (that encouraged supermarket shoppers to hygienically handle bread). The independent variables were (a) sign content (justification vs. consequence vs. justification and consequence vs. neutral) and (b) form of request (prescriptive vs. proscriptive). After assessing the subjective level of the signs’ persuasiveness through a survey (N = 240), we observed people’s compliance in a natural experiment (N = 1.440). Signs containing both a justification and information about consequences achieved the highest rating and actual compliance.","PeriodicalId":46580,"journal":{"name":"Social Influence","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A slice of hygiene: justification and consequence in the persuasiveness of prescriptive and proscriptive signs\",\"authors\":\"Krzysztof J. Leoniak, Konrad Maj\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15534510.2016.1267663\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Studies concerning sign effectiveness highlight the use of justifications and information about consequences of non-compliance. Assuming that the most persuasive messages contain both types of information, we compared the effectiveness of eight different signs (that encouraged supermarket shoppers to hygienically handle bread). The independent variables were (a) sign content (justification vs. consequence vs. justification and consequence vs. neutral) and (b) form of request (prescriptive vs. proscriptive). After assessing the subjective level of the signs’ persuasiveness through a survey (N = 240), we observed people’s compliance in a natural experiment (N = 1.440). Signs containing both a justification and information about consequences achieved the highest rating and actual compliance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46580,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Influence\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Influence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2016.1267663\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Influence","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2016.1267663","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4

摘要

摘要:关于标志有效性的研究强调了不遵守的理由和后果信息的使用。假设最有说服力的信息包含这两种类型的信息，我们比较了八种不同标志的有效性(鼓励超市购物者卫生地处理面包)。自变量是(a)签名内容(理由vs.结果vs.理由和结果vs.中立)和(b)请求形式(规定性vs.禁止性)。在通过调查(N = 240)评估了标志的主观说服力水平后，我们在自然实验(N = 1.440)中观察了人们的依从性。包含理由和结果信息的标志获得了最高评级和实际遵守。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

A slice of hygiene: justification and consequence in the persuasiveness of prescriptive and proscriptive signs

Abstract Studies concerning sign effectiveness highlight the use of justifications and information about consequences of non-compliance. Assuming that the most persuasive messages contain both types of information, we compared the effectiveness of eight different signs (that encouraged supermarket shoppers to hygienically handle bread). The independent variables were (a) sign content (justification vs. consequence vs. justification and consequence vs. neutral) and (b) form of request (prescriptive vs. proscriptive). After assessing the subjective level of the signs’ persuasiveness through a survey (N = 240), we observed people’s compliance in a natural experiment (N = 1.440). Signs containing both a justification and information about consequences achieved the highest rating and actual compliance.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Social Influence PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL-

CiteScore

1.50

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Social Influence is a journal that provides an integrated focus for research into this important, dynamic, and multi-disciplinary field. Topics covered include: conformity, norms, social influence tactics such as norm of reciprocity, authority, scarcity, interpersonal influence, persuasion, power, advertising, mass media effects, political persuasion, propaganda, comparative influence, compliance, minority influence, influence in groups, cultic influence, social movements, social contagions, rumors, resistance to influence, influence across cultures, and the history of influence research.